Reply to Re: YeOldeDink 0.1: A Freedink Fork
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
>Why not work with making a new version of the more versatile Windinkeditplus2
1. As has been mentioned above, the source isn't available.
2. Even if it was, I wouldn't bother. The WDE source is a mess in other ways, mainly due to being Windows-only.
3. Beuc attempted a LinDinkEdit port years ago which never reached a functional state.
4. My general dislike of WDE is well-known.
5. The minor things holding back FDE that would make a big difference such as sprite property editing and default nohit etc should be straightforward to implement.
Edit: 6. Now that RW has ported the rendering backend of WDE2+ to SDL2, it might be feasible to strip away all the Windows-specific MFC stuff and replace its functionality with ImGui.My brief investigations have yielded positive results in that regard, but I don't know how it would be in practice. My wheels are already in motion with Freedink/edit, however, and I don't really have the inclination to attempt such a thing.
1. As has been mentioned above, the source isn't available.
2. Even if it was, I wouldn't bother. The WDE source is a mess in other ways, mainly due to being Windows-only.
3. Beuc attempted a LinDinkEdit port years ago which never reached a functional state.
4. My general dislike of WDE is well-known.
5. The minor things holding back FDE that would make a big difference such as sprite property editing and default nohit etc should be straightforward to implement.
Edit: 6. Now that RW has ported the rendering backend of WDE2+ to SDL2, it might be feasible to strip away all the Windows-specific MFC stuff and replace its functionality with ImGui.My brief investigations have yielded positive results in that regard, but I don't know how it would be in practice. My wheels are already in motion with Freedink/edit, however, and I don't really have the inclination to attempt such a thing.
